WEven if Republican politicians and the right-wing media refer to “critical racial theory,” it has little to do with critical racial theory as a practical field. Developed by law professors in the 1970s and 1980s, especially Harvard University’s Derrick Bell and his acolite Kimberlé Crenshaw, the actual CRT is historic, with how scholars can reproduce racism by law. Racism can survive after discriminatory policies are revised.
But perhaps the point is the very ambiguity of this genuine critical racial theory. Few people heard about critical racial theory before it became the subject of the latest moral panic of American rights. The phrase itself sounds distant, lofty, and abstract – “critical”, “theory” – like coming out of the mouth of the tweed blazer people, and I think it’s better than me. .. The very opacity of the words made them the perfect vehicle for what the right wing wanted: a new vessel for white racial anxiety and complaints.
As a result, what the Republicans call “critical racial theory” has become central to a series of state bills aimed at banning honest conversations about race and sexual repression in the United States from the classroom. I did. Republicans oppose the idealism that whites’ sinfulness and inferiority complex dominates the country and teaches children, and puts “critical racial theory” into a possible American past or present. I use it as a catch-all for discussions. To make their base uncomfortable.
A law has been passed arguing that the public school curriculum bans critical racial theory Arkansas, Florida, Idaho, Iowa, Oklahoma, Tennessee,and Texas, And proceed with Arizona, Connecticut, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Ohio, New hampshire, North Carolina, South Carolina, South dakota, Utah,and West Virginia.. The bill itself is clearly unconstitutional and will not last in court. And even if the bill isn’t destined to be abandoned, it’s hard to imagine how the bill will be enforced in a meaningful way, so it’s not very specific about what they oppose. ..
But the bill is gesturing towards America’s calm willingness to revoke speech protection and crush academic freedom. Modeled To Other countries Authoritarian sentiment is rising. Some instructors It is already affected by the ban.
The ban wording is large enough to ban a vast area of discourse. North Carolina lawIn the “concept” that public schools “should not promote”, “the belief that the United States is meritocracy is essentially a racist or sexist belief,” “the United States is specific. Created by members of race or gender. ” The purpose of oppressing members of different races and genders. ” Bill proposed in ConnecticutOn the other hand, prohibiting the teaching of “divisional concepts” or content that cause “individuals to feel discomfort, guilt, distress, or other forms of psychological distress because of their race or gender.” I will.
This last item may be most obvious because we are concerned about the emotions of white schoolboys.A move to ban the discussion of racism and oppression as systematic and socially fundamental follows the University of North Carolina’s decision to refuse to serve as a journalist for the New York Times. Nicole Hannah JonesThe creator of the 1619 project, with the intervention of a major donor. It was also a year after the national riots in response to the police killing of George Floyd. Both of these events have attracted passionate backlash in the right-wing media and have been described as assaults on police, “order”, and whites. Packaged together as “Critical Racial Theory,” these conversations attempt to reaffirm our understanding of race, racism, and American history, centered on whites as the primary moral player. Shown on the right.
For Republicans, the favorable story of race and American history is to minimize harm to blacks, exaggerate the virtues of whites, and racism is not a system of building culture, but misguided people and morals. Institutions claim to be a personal prejudice in the minds of people.Racism was The problem is that some whites made mistakes, so this story tells us (with an emphasis on the past). It’s no longer a problem, as those whites are enlightened. This version of American history has honestly placed racist injustice in the past, but it also does not recognize racism as an infection that has polluted our culture, but individuals. Isolate racism in your heart. Racism, in this story, is primarily a matter of personality and of individual white souls.
However, many modern anti-racist ideas reject this. The 1619 project positions blacks and their slavery as the center of American history, and slavery as the protagonist as well as footnotes and minor characters. And the true critical racial theory practiced in law school does not seem to be as relevant to the white soul as the material conditions of blacks. Maybe this is part of what Republicans hate about these versions of anti-racist ideas: they remove whites and white emotions from the center of the story.
After all, if racism is just a personal peculiarity, not a general condition, whites and the institutions they control, except to deny that they feel hatred in their hearts. Does not need anything. But if racism is the basic reality and not just personal prejudice, then much more changes need to be made. And more is required of whites than personal innocence.
What is Moral Panic about “Critical Racial Theory” | Moiradnegan
Source link What is Moral Panic about “Critical Racial Theory” | Moiradnegan